I've got a question regarding the popularity of people switching from Buddhism to AF. I mean no offense by my question and have a sincere interest in the answer you may provide.
It seems like many people are switching to Actualism after reaching/attaining MCTB 4th path. It seems there is much left to be done after reaching that point. (I'm only a stream enterer, so this is just what I've read from others). I'm curious if anyone here, or anyone known to anyone here, has reached/attained the level of arahat according to the parameters of the ten fetters model and then chosen to switch to actualism? An arahat according to the ten fetters model would seem to be very different from a MCTB arahat. I'm also curious why the switch seems popular instead of continuing on a Buddhist path? What makes the Actualist approach more appealing then continuing on a path that has already proven to be successful? Thanks.

First up, not a fan of calling MCTB 4th path arahat but meh!

Secondly, I can't get passed the fact , from my own experience, that a sense of "being" persists via the arising of any affective feeling, subtle or gross, pleasant, unpleasant or neutral. And this sense of "being" seems to allow for all sorts of mischief to bite me on the bum...craving, aversion etc. Of course , I can choose to watch the sensations that make up the compounded affective feelings do their thing, but a subtle sense of affect always remains and thus a sense of "being" persists.

I'm convinced that the sense of "being" (affective feelings) has to go for there to be complete peace. The sense of "being" is the sense of presence that, although easily seen to be transient impersonal phenomena, still arises to influence the occasional samsaric nipple burn. Although all nipple burns are sticky-free post MCTB-4th path. There is just no stacking of suffering.

Certain compounding is still occurring, yet no self can be seen in any of it. But suffering in suffering (even without a self anywhere to be seen) is still suffering. PCE practice showed and continues to show what I equate to be the cause of it all. An attachment to being (via the arising of affective feelings). Affective feelings seem to be compounded in order for a sense of "being" to arise, in order for there to be a continuous flow of becoming, becoming, becoming.

The only way I see how we all suffer, is via the arising of affective feelings. Craving, averision and all feelings related to either one, are all affective. Without the sense of "being" (affective feelings) there is absolutely no suffering, stacking or no stacking--> The freedom from suffering I've always been seeking. I don't care what it's called or if it's considered buddhist or not.

PCE/AF practice is proving to be very, very, very progressive for me. When I was doing this practice, http://thehamiltonproject.blogspot.com/2011/01/yogi-tool-box-letting-go-approach-to.html
I "felt" like I was progressing too (A lot of NS was blissing me out) But still, a sense of "being" persists in all the jhanas. I wasn't seeing this being dealt with.

So, I returned to PCE practice and all interest in jhanas and nanas (they don't arise in PCEs) went out the window. The sense of being is losing hold, and getting closer and closer to walking into oblivion willingly. After all, it's a useless illusion now. It doesn't need to be there in any transient, impersonal form. Life has improved tenfold and I'm in it for the life improvement , not the jhanas/nanas spiritual trip nor to feel like I "belong" to a group nor feel like saving the world. I'm in it to be happy and harmless for my loved ones and those around me.

This is something probably best answered by yourself when you get to MCTB 4th. You can then see for yourself what all the fuss is about. And the fetter model arahat proven track record? Do you know anyone who professes to getting to the fetter model arahat stage? I think Kenneth Folk may have sort of claimed this a while ago, but Im not sure. If a sense of "being" persists, even though all affect is pleasant and nice, a fire can always get sparked where there are glowing hot coals sitting there waiting for a gust of wind (affective feelings) IMO. The sense of "being" has to go for there to be freedom from suffering. This is my current opinion due to PCE practice.

:-)

Nick

Nik, in your opinion is there any point at all in practising Buddhism if AF is a superior method? (serious question).

Surely there are some non-AF methods that have resulted in practitioners becoming totally self-less? I know Richard says there aren't any, but what about you guys - what do you say? Is the difficulty here that no one really knows where anyone else is on the path?

I really don't know, CCC. I don't know for sure if AF is not Buddhist. I don't know if MCTB 4th is supposed to be what it's often called. I don't know if perhaps the fetter model arhat is just refining the attention wave to a degree where no negative feelings arise, where jhanas are still accessed, where the specific fetters mentioned in the model are dealt with (eradicated in all forms). I just don't know. And I don't think anyone else does either, including RIchard. Everyone is throwing out their own opinions and ideas, but no-one really seems to know for sure.

If you spent all your days meditating, and say, practicing the jhana approach in the link above, I reckon you could truly refine the attention wave (affective feelings/sense of "being"/sense of presence) to a comfortable degree. But I can't get past the fact, that any affective feeling when it arises, and this includes a feeling of compassion, an affective equanimity, sympathetic joy and loving kindness, there is a subtle sense of "being" or presence that arises with them. And I currently see this as just more "becoming", conceiving and compounding of feelings to continue the flow of beocming, of being. That is how I see it for the moment.

I'm starting to let go of trying to resolve the differences between AF and buddhism, terminolgy or outcome. I care less now and I think that is due to the fact that I have had it impressed on me via PCE practice that Nick as this mind/body organism is at peace , happy and harmless, more productive as a human, more pleasant to be around without "me" having a stake in any of it. My wife benefits. My family benefits and THIS is what matters to me. Why do "I" need to have a stake in anything when "I" am such a useless unnecessary illusion. Can't get passed that now. If you wanted to argue for Buddhist connections you could quote at least the Malunkya Putta sutta, where a literal explanation of PCE practice seems to be the Buddha's instruction:



I really don't know what is better and what is possible. I have changed my brain profoundly in the past year and a bit. I don't see why it is impossible to further the changes. Perhaps AF really is a step further. I mean an Arahat is supposed to not conceive of anything in anything, yet jhanas are still accessed. Perhaps there is further development post- MCTB 4th path that leads to all of this. i'm sure there is. I just don't want to spend a lifetime in robes or in a cave to find out.

There was also some talk of how in a PCE or upon AF one can still incline the mind in the way of the 1st-8th jhanas, and, though there is no attention wave, perception kind of takes on certain angles in a weird way which I can't describe well, having not experienced it and not remembering the description I heard exactly (Nick, maybe you can try it when you're in a nice PCE?). So it's like, the perception is moving at the correct angles (same way as non-PCE jhanas) but they just don't seem to 'do' anything.. like there's no point to them (paraphrasing?). perhaps that is what is meant by the part Nick bolded. Though it is also weird that the Buddha kept meditating, since AF people don't seem to find any need to do that.

But yea it doesn't matter anyway.. here's a practice, it ends suffering.

Yeh, I'm leaning towards it doesn't really matter anyway-->end of suffering does. I don't have any desire to dwell in jhana anymore or use them somehow. They are full of tension(conditioning factors) anyway. They pale in comparison to the clean , pristine purity of PCE mode. No sense of "being" or I AM to have a stake in anything.

I've tried the jhanas in PCE mode and you are correct. The only things that change are the eye and mental focus. There is no affective quality to them. For example the eyes shift about from just in front of the nose for 1st, widening for second, going to the periphery for 3rd, taking in all of what is seen in 4th. I can't remember experiemnting with the 5th, 6th , 7th and 8th jhanas. I'll have to remember to dot hat next time in PCE mode.

I have also experimented with going into each jhana and then asking HAIETMOBA in each one and having attention moving to apperception. The jhanas lose their form when that happens and that sense of "inner world", which seems to be the attention wave fixed in certain patterns, drops away and the focus moves to the back of the eyelids being taken as an object by the eyes and sounds to the ears become more the momentary experience rather than the jhanic vibratory patterns.

The jhanas, IMO, are all about presence and maintaining a sense of being, and the attention wave in specific positions or patterns. The differing vibratory phenomena that occurs in each jhana also drops away as , whenever I get into PCE mode, those vibrations (energy?) seem to get sucked down the spine like a genie in a bottle and end up in the hara spot.

I actually do think now that 4th path as we're discussing it is 4th path as the Theravadans discuss it, but my belief is that, like every other important landmark within spiritual development, it's become dressed up in so much bullshit that the truth has been enshrouded in myth which has continued to confuse and mislead so many.

When it comes to trying to resolve AF with Buddhism, I think that this would be a waste of time in all honesty. They're two different systems with two different outcomes, Buddhism removed the illusion of duality i.e. fundamental suffering, and AF removes emotional affect i.e. the "human condition", and to try to show them to be similar would be an exercise in shoehorning.

I honestly don't think that the Buddha was talking about PCE's although that's not to say that it isn't the case, no offence Nick but I think we need to maintain some objectivity when mapping one description written, and probably not directly from Sid himself, a few thousand years ago with something which, if we take the official AF line, has only supposedly been discovered in the last 20+ years. I think there's a massive risk here when trying to line these systems up, especially referencing writings which have been translated, re-translated, edited and commented upon throughout history. If we tried hard enough we could probably make biblical, or koranic descriptions fit with it but that's the nature of the mind and, regardless of attainment, that function still operates.

I like Dan's suggestion about them being on different axis of development and I think that this is a useful way to view AF alongside 4th path, they're just different ways of developing which, while available to anyone, may or may not be suitable for everyone.

Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law, and all that jazz....

Like i said, we all have opinions and I reckon none of us know for sure. This exchange has made it clearer to me that it is not important for me to really distinguish anymore. And thus I relinquish the "beliefs" that I have held onto for dear life. If people want to separate AF and Buddhist terminology and avoid overlapping, so be it. I don't think "I" have any stake in this anymore. The end of suffering is what matters to me and MCTB 4th didn't deliver.

BTW, Tommy, are you claiming MCTB 4th path now? If so, congrats!

;-)

EDIT: The Buddha supposedly taught one thing and one thing only-->the end of suffering. Did MCTB 4th path address this for anyone else? I wouldn't trade having gotten 4th for anything else (except AF), and it put to rest a certain suffering yes indeed. yet, something unsatisfactory remains and thus it is left wanting. Are you sure about all of the stuff that contradicts the 4th path result is just pure myth and fantasy, Tommy? Hasn't Kenneth thrown out the view that 4th path (5th stage in his 7 stages of enlightemnet) is the arahat?

Please read: http://kennethfolkdharma.wetpaint.com/thread/4441395/The+7+Stage+Model

In the thread linked, Kenneth admits that his new 7 stage model includes the fetter model arahat at the 7th stage. And the 6th stage being equal to the fetter model anagami. Do you disagree with him and why? I don't follow this model myself, as I have heard that Kenneth is still working on disembedding from narrative thought, an 8th stage?



Don't exaggerate! Translating the koran? Come on! Hehe, What risks would there be? Let's hash them out in this thread.

Let's not forget about Chuck Kasmire, who has described his condition as fetter-model arhat. I'll just add that, from first encountering this pragmatic dharma scene in late summer 09, it seemed that Kenneth, Daniel and Chuck were describing different states-- although I know they all (publicly at least) recognized each others' conditions as equivalent. This impression of mine has only increased-- however, of course, it's just my impression of others' descriptions. It seems telling though that Chuck seemed to recognize much of what Kenneth began describing last fall as the latter went through his Sixth adn Seventh stages.

Also purely my interpretation of others' experiences, but worth mentioning I suppose, is that what Chuck and the AF people describe (different, yes, for sure, but far more similar than the descriptions of AF and MCTB fourth path, it seems to me) is generally what I've been aimed at, based on extrapolations from peak experiences including some aspects of my first A&P and the insights which arose in its wake, for my whole life. So there is that :-)

I agree with Nik-- we just don't know yet. It will take time (and perhaps some scientific research) to come to more than speculative conclusions about how these things may relate. You have a very valid point about translation, commentary, and mythic amplification Tommy-- no doubt about it. Yet 'the end of suffering' is pretty clear. The four noble truths is pretty clear in what it's expressing-- suffering doesn't arise in a vacuum. There are causes and conditions. It has long been claimed that removing these is possible in this very life. Maybe we should all retain open minds, along with wise criticality? After all, none of us here is really after opinions-- we want to know, for ourselves.

Thanks everyone for the thoughtful responses. To paraphrase, and shorten, AF seems to deliver the end of suffering faster. Cool, that was my assumption, but was curious with the whole "find out for yourself" attitude prevalent in the pragmatic dharma scene why no one seems to talk about going for, or achieving, the ten fetters arahat. The possibility of ending suffering in 2 weeks certainly has appeal, especially in this day and age. Thanks again !!

probably because it's the pragmatic dharma scene, and no one seems to have claimed achieving 10-fetter arahat. and those who were MCTB-enlightened pre-AF didn't seem to see any way of progressing. I didn't know Chuck did. I understood that he was 'just' MCTB-enlightened.

But no one, i'm aware of(very limited knowledge admittedly), seems to be striving in that direction, which surprises the hell out of me. Not sure if this is the goal that Kenneth is after or not.

well, what's the point of 10-fetter arahat? to end suffering. a lot of people are striving for that!

One thing I think we need to be clearer about though is what the Buddha meant by suffering, my take is that he was talking about the whole dualistic identification process rather than physically suffering. I think this is quite difficult to clearly differentiate, I suppose that we could say that, when it really comes down to it, both systems are aiming for the same outcome but to different degrees. If you believe that AF will lead to the end of suffering for you then more power to you, I have no issue with the aims of the practice and, although I'm not drawn to it myself, I appreciate sensible discussions like this.

As for Kenneth's model, to be honest I avoided it and have only recently had a look at it as it would have just become a further complication. I enjoy a good model or map, but that's all they are and I can't really comment on the ten fetter model as I haven't looked into it much although I remember an earlier thread where you talked about this.

When it comes to the whole arahat debate, I think that the attainment of 4th path may be more of a starting point than an ending but the freedom from identification which comes with that makes the removal of the remaining fetters much more likely within a shorter period of time. I'm still open to being completely wrong on all of this, I don't have sufficient knowledge of Buddhist texts and dogma to have a balanced view on the subject but I can see how confusing the whole thing gets after a point.

Me getting 4th path? There's definitely the feeling of being done, of being "off the ride" which has been there since the 28th of last month and remained the same, but I'm holding fire from saying anything else until I can be completely certain 'cause it's early days and I'm prone to speaking too soon about this stuff. I've had that "done" feeling before and then had my ass kicked by DN shortly thereafter. I'm not too fussed to be honest, I know that might sound daft but if I'm wrong I'm wrong and life goes on.

The koran thing, that's an extreme example of course but it's completely possible to end up interpreting things in a certain light because we're looking for evidence to support a belief. I was highlighting this because I know how easy it is to do just that without even realizing, regardless of how objective we think we're being, so I remain cautious of it.

Risks? Just misinterpretation, or trying to make facts fit with a certain map or model. You know what it's like, this territory is so vast and complex that there's room for all manner of interpretations and trying to line up aspects of traditions is a nightmare of a project!

I think we're agreeing on the main point here, ending suffering.

Metta Down Y'er Nadis,
Tommy

The texts are quite explicit in saying that the Buddha and arahats experience absolutely no negative emotion, ever.

The conflict is that they also say they have Jhanas/ NS / etc.

So to reconcile the current findings with the ancient texts one would have to decide which of these is less important (to them).

isn't it interesting that most of the buddha's lessons had to do with the practicalities of non-attachment (in various ways, by various names), and yet some people can't seem to detach from what they think and feel buddhism to be on about, despite the practicality of doing so? not to imply that anyone in this thread is necessarily doing that ... just food for thought.

Oh, I've definitely got some attachments to my ideas about Buddhism, and a lot of other things, but it is lessening with my continuing practice, which further motivates me. But good point, there seems to be a lot of defensiveness, which theoretically shouldn't be there, on both sides of this coin(AF/Buddhism).

Hah, that reminds me of the Actualism Calenture.

The disharmony you’ve observed is the human condition, and it has ‘been there’ (naturally) since time immemorial. It is ‘both sides of this coin’ and the stress perceived to be between them as well … after all, ‘I’ am the ‘human condition’ and the ‘human condition’ is ‘me’.

What I once noticed was that when I held no allegiances, there was nothing to defend. With nothing to defend, I grew dispassionate. Without ally or enemy, the need for 'defense' born of fear and 'offense' born of aggression became utterly redundant. I dropped all 'my' armaments and became harmless … and a delicately sweet peace settled all about. Such is the result of a mind which refuses ill-will for any and every reason it can find; which may mean simply rejecting it by principle, or perhaps because of some specific reasoning.

So the notion about whether it ‘shouldn’t be there’ is beside the point, because it is already there. 'I' am both the 'offense' and 'defense', and it is because 'I' have chosen 'sides'. A more relevant question, then, may be: what am I going to do about it? Do 'I' dare care enough about ‘humanity’ to abandon it and all of the various divisions and groups that make it up?